to< 












V 






r ,/ /J 



,v 











* 


\ 


*o 


V*" 






^° 


^. 









A 



,v' 



<> * O M O 







c 






.V „ * fl 






<?> 












?> V 










7 _ 













V 



^o* 



>. 



v2 ' * * V 



AT *>• 



/^ 



%/" '? X/ 







o \^#^* <)' ^ * 














^ ^ 



^ ♦>/08k>\ -r 

















«£■ 



^ V 






•j^ h 



A VIEW 



OF 



LAVEBY, 



MORAL. AJTD POLITICAL,. 



By A. D. SIMS, A. B. 



« Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy 
of all honour r that the name of God aud his doctrine be not blasphemed. And 
they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they 
are brethren : but rather do them service, because they are faithful and 
beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort." 

lTiM.vi.1,2. 




* CHARLESTON*. 

PRINTED BY A. E. MILLER, 

No. 4 Broad-stiee.t. 

1834. 






. c 






ENTERED ACCORDING TO ACT OF CONGRESS, IN THE YEAR 1834, 
BY A. D. SIMS, IN CLERK'S OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF 
SOUTH-CAROLINA. 



PREFACE. 



►Some time in the course of the last summer, the au- 
thor met with an article in the Christian Advocate and 
Journal, (a gazette published in the City of New- York, 
under the management of the Methodist Episcopal 
Church,) which he considered highly offensive. It de- 
nounced Slavery as immoral and anti-christian, and by 
consequence, inferred the immorality and impiety of all 
slave-holders. 

Upon reading the article referred to, the author pre- 
pared a brief synopsis of the argument in defence of the 
morality of Slavery and transmitted it to the editor of 
the Journal for publication; but he declined to give it 
an insertion. The resolution was subsequently made, 
to put the argument into a more regular form and submit 
it to the public. 

The fact is, the slave-holders have been too lono- 
silent under the sneers and fanatic ebullitions of ignorant 
and wicked pretenders to philanthropy. The argu- 
ment is clearly on their side of the question, and the 



VI PREFACE. 

signs of the times* imperatively call upon them to use it. 
There can be no doubt, that their property is in jeopar- 
dy, either from direct interference, or from indirect in- 
fluence ; and it would much hasten their ruin, if they 
could be brought to aid the abolition-schemes of the 
North, through ignorance of the true state of the ques- 
tion, or from the false compunctions of an uninformed 
conscience. 

Tn the following pages, an attempt is made to vindi- 
cate the Institution of Slavery from the unmerited re- 
proaches which have been heaped upon it. In the dis- 
cussion of the subject, t&e Scripture division of moral 
subjects, into things in themselves wrong, and things 
wrong from a consideration of their consequences, has 
been observed. It must be owned, that there is much 
plausibility in the Utilitarian Theory : but the author 
prefers the known and scriptural doctrine; and happily, 
it best serves the cause of truth in the investigation on 
hand. They are chiefly misguided religionists, who 
arc, at this da}-, producing mischief and exciting alarm 
on the subject of Slavery. With sach persons the Bibb 
cannot fail to be good authority on any subject; and on 
tiii:'. much the most apposite ana conclusive. 

Sia*-'' writing these pages, a small pamphlet, written 
by the late Richard Furman, D. D. of Charleston, S. C. 
on t: : - et of Slavery, has been put into the hand-. 
<d' the author: and he is much pleased to find a co-inci- 



* See Westminster Review. No. xxxvi, American Edition No. 
ii, Art. iv. Also, the Dec.hmuhm of lbs Anti-Slavery Convention 
in Philadelphia. Dec. 1833. 



PREFACE. \i! 

dence of opinion between himself and that great and 
good man, whose name siiij sheds a pious fragrance 
throughout the limits of ids acquaintance, on many 
important points of the subject under examination. 

The second Part, containing an examination of the 
Political Question, will be published during the ensuing 
spring or summer; in the mean time, the following view 
of the Moral Question is submitted with diffidence to the 
public. The author would have been much pleased if 
an abler hand had assumed the task which he has so 
imperfectly performed ; but amid the silence of others, 
he felt disposed to do all in his power to arrest the 
growing influence of error, and if possible, avert the 
approaching storm which the signs of the times portend 
on the subject of his inquiry. 

Darlington, S. C. ) 

Dec. IMS:.. » 






TIIJE M01l*ll< QUJESTIOJW 






'••■ 



■' 



SECTIOX I. 



The Morality of Slavery, considered in tuk 

abstract. 



JH K\\ subjects excite a deeper interest in Christian 
communities, than the existence of Negro Slavery in 
the Southern States of North America. Many con- 
sider it not less a libel on those opinions of freedom 
which the States inculcate, than a gross immorality and 
heinous impiety. The slave-holder, even, has some 
limes admitted it to be a great moral evil, at the same 
time purging himself of guilt in the matter, by suggest- 
ing the non-concurrence of his assent in its introduction. 
and the impracticability of its extinction- 
No one will deny that Slavery is a moral evil. It 
grows out of the corruption of human nature doubtless. 
and would have been as little necessary in the manage- 
ment of human affairs, had man sustained his primi- 
tive innocence and moral image of God, as civil res- 
traints. 

But, though Slavery is a moral evil, few, when prop- 
erly informed, will pronounce it immoral ; and yet with 
many, such an opinion prevails.* 

When we speak of morality, a standard of right and 
wrong is implied. Without such a standard, our ideas 

* See Declaration of Anti-Slavery Convention. Westminster 
Review, American edition, No. If. Art. iv. Notes to Cooper's 
Justinian, p. 413. 



12 THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. 

on moral subjects must be confused and imperfect : right 
and wrong must be diversified according to tbe various 
conceptions of individuals ; and morality itself be re- 
solved into a system of conventional rules of local and 
temporary obligation. 

But such is not Morality. Its sanctions are immuta- 
ble, and its requirements uniform. What is right at one 
time or in one place, is right at all times and in all 
places. Also, of things in themselves wrong, neither 
time nor circumstance can change their moral complex- 
ion. True, many things are in themselves neither right 
nor wronsr, but receive their moral character from their 
social tendencies. But we are not now considering this 
class of subjects. 

There is then a standard of right and wrong, and 
that standard is the Law of God, known to his creatures 
in his Word and in his works, immutable in its nature 
and requirements, and of universal obligation. When 
the Word of God plainly declares his will, (which is his 
Law,) there is no need to consult the more dubious 
exposition of his works ; but we may rest satisfied with 
the information vouchsafed, and practice upon it with 
safety. 

This Word is plain in its declarations, and clear in its 
inferences on the subject now under consideration. 
Read its declarations : " Both thy bondmen, and thy 
bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the 
heathen that are round about you ; of them shall ye 
buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the chil- 
dren of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of 
them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with 
you, which they begat in your land : and they shall be 
your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheri- 
tance for your children after you, to inherit them for a 
possession ; they shall be your bondmen forever ; but 
over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not 
rule one over another with rigour."* 

* Lev. xxv. 44, 45, 46. 



THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY^ 13 

These extracts from Holy Writ unequivocally assert 
the right of property in slaves, together with the usual 
incidents of that right ; such as the power of acquisition 
and disposition in various ways according to municipal 
regulations. The right to buy and sell, and to transmit 
to children by way of inheritance, is clearly stated. 
The only restriction on the subject, is in reference to 
the market, in which slaves or bondmen were to be 
purchased. " Of the heathen ," and " of the children 
of the strangers, fyc. shall ye buy bondmen and bond- 
maids." The restriction cannot in the least, affect the 
question of morality. 

The Greeks called all the world but themselves 
barbarians ; so among the Jews, all beyond the pale of 
their own country and not of the lineage of Jacob, were 
heathen. With the restriction, therefore, the permitted 
slave-market was very extensive. 

But the restriction was not designed, nor did it oper- 
ate, to prevent Israelites from becoming bondmen. Its 
intention was, to inhibit the practice of buying and sell- 
ing Israelites as merchandise, and thus prevent their 
falling into the hands of strangers as slaves ;* and to 
inculcate this salutary lesson of patriotism, that the 
country and countrymen of a Jew should be dearer to 
him than any other country or any other people. A 
lesson worthy to be learned every where ! Jews might 
become bondmen, and like others of that condition take 
nothing from the return of Jubilee, but remain in bond- 
age forever.f Thus we see, that so far as the simple 
question of Slavery was concerned, no restriction in 
fact existed ; slaves might be made of Jews or Gentiles, 
which classification embraced ail mankind! 

If Slavery were immoral, a something malum in se, 
God would not have incorporated it into the system of 
government and laws instituted by himself for the Jews, 
but would have plainly forbidden it. But if it were not 

* 1 Milman's History of the Jews, p. 107 and 113. 
r Exod. xxi. 2. 5, 6. 

2 



14 THE MORALITY OP SLAVERY. 

immoral for a Jew to have a bondman .for .hu = iou 
„, rt transmit him as an inheritance to Ins cli.iaien , 
cerunly cannot be wrong for a Carolinian or a Geor- 
ln ohavea similar possession, and transmit to his 
!hi d en a similar inheritance. No evasion can elude 
'he con dusion, that Slavery was recogmzed ... * e Jew«h 
hPocracv and that it cannot be immoral, unless God 8 
aws change with the changing circumstances of t.me 
aTd place, g or unless God can sanction .mmoral.ty, the 
suDnosition of which would be profane. 

But Sections may be advanced against this conclu- 
sion It may be said", that the term, bondmaa doe* .no 
convey the idea of a modern slave, and if it did, bond 
are amonff the Jews was a civil regulation, and no part 
:f the rno'al law, and hence no conclusion » morals can 

W2SSJW**-. is ° b ir to* 

of fact the Negro slave of the Southern States of North 
Amer ca is in a more eligible condition than that of a 
America, i . i 6 omit ted, this alone 

^^hrai^n. Among the J^-J™ 
permitted, "> -me cases to *ke* hfe of toborf 

Sally £T MA" SUi»- . Not so in 

P ^ ™ Np<rrn-slaverv. To kill a slave, is as much 

Turd r in cCSSn of lawt and enlightened public 

ThT—r Tp-f "o^wrpWge himself by „a,h 4 
33*£S " g ht, . *** «'-ry is right. 
tXctsofAss.ofS.C. 1740, P. L. 173. 



THE MORALITY OF SLAVEBY. 15 

Again. What is morally wrong, cannot be politically 
right, nor can Deity sanction, much less institute, civil 
regulations at war with good morals. Bondage cer- 
tainly was a civil regulation and no part of the moral 
law, yet, instituted as it was, by God himself, it was 
consistent with morality. The Decalogue is a synopsis 
of the Moral Law, and this no where condemns 
Slavery, but on the contrary justifies it, by prescribing 
rules appertaining to the relations of life, which it 
creates.* 

But it may perhaps, be replied, that God did not 
institute the civil regulations of the Jews, and that 
inspiration was vouchsafed to Moses only on doctrinal 
points and not on historical! and civil. 

We are not ignorant, that such an opinion has been 
entertained and publicly defended, by many and able 
divines. Such names as Tillotson and Warberton 
cannot fail to give respect to any opinion connected 
with theology ; to say nothing of many others, who, 
have equally with them, contended for the same limita- 
tion on the office of inspiration. But we cannot, for a 
moment, entertain the belief, that there is the least truth, 
no matter how much plausibility there may be, in the 
opinion. The consequences, to which such an opinion 
leads, are not only dangerous, but absolutely subversive 
of the whole system of revelation. To say nothing of 
the fraud and falsehood, of which such an opinion would 
necessarily convict Moses, the chosen instrument of 
God, through whom, to make a gracious communication 
of his will, to his creatures, we would ask, what part of 
the Bible must be taken as inspired, and what not ? 
Who shall determine as to the parts to be believed, and 
those that may be rejected 1 If the whole of the Bible 
be not inspired, then the door is thrown open to reject 
the whole. One person may take one part as inspired ; 
and another person another part ; and alternately reject 
parts, until, between the two, the whole volume will br 

* Exod. xx. 10, 17. r Mr. Hind* 



l-ti THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. 

pronounced an uninspired book. Into such difficulties* 
does learning fall, when by ingenuity, it seeks to evade 
or explain away the plain and obvious declarations of 
God's Word! 

There are two other considerations, which go far to 
vindicate the abstract morality of Slavery ; the one 
drawn from the light of nature ; the other from revela- 
tion. 

1. Slavery has existed, in some form, in every age of 
the world and in almost every country.* Even in the 
present age, when fanatic zeal has done so much and left 
scarcely any thing unattempted, the civilized world have 
not agreed in, the abolition of the African slave-trade,! 
much less in the condemnation of Slavery. This fact is 
of no little importance. It exhibits the opinion in 
favour of the moral propriety of Slavery. When, too, 
we reflect, that the opinion of mankind has been uniform 
on this subject as well as universal, under every variety 
of institutions, both civil and religious ; and that such 
uniformity would hardly have existed if Slavery had 
been in itself wrong, and in the fitness of things improper, 
the force of the consideration becomes powerful. Had 
it been wrong, the native evil in it, would have been 
detected somewhere, at some time. Those crimes con- 
demned in the Bible as malum in se, have never received 
fhe uniform and united approbation of mankind in 
opposition to the declarations of that sacred volume. 
Though some nations may have justified a crime, others 
condemned it ; and what one age improperly allowed, 
another more informed corrected. So strong is the 
force of nature, even in the human heart, to teach the 
way of truth !$ 

2. The New-Testament, in various places, enjoins 
on the servant strict obedience to his master ;§ and the 



* See Prof. Dew's Disquisition on Slavery. 

t Kent's Cora. 1 vol. p. 179. 

I Rom. i. 20, 21, and Rom. ii. 14, 15. 

<S Eph. vi. 5. 1 Pet. ii. 18, 19. 1 Tim. vi. 1, % 3, 4, 5 



THE MORALITY QF SLAVERY. If 

Moral Law as much forbids the coveting of a man- 
servant or maid- servant, as the coveting of any other 
species of property.* 

If Slavery were like murder or theft, in itself wrong, 
the Word of God would as plainly forbid it, as it does 
them ; nor would the Moral Law class the man-servant 
and maid-servant with other property and forbid to covet 
them, were the possession of them as property, immoral. 
Indeed, the Bible could not, consistently with its purity 
and the unerring wisdom of inspiration enjoin obedi- 
ence on the servant, if servitude were in itself immoral ; 
for, every act of obedience would involve the idea of 
immorality and the injunction to obey would be equalh 
implicated in guilt. 

It cannot be objected that the Slavery or servitude 
spoken of in the New-Testament, where obedience is 
enjoined on the servant, was milder in its form or less 
objectionable in its character, than is modern Negro 
Slavery. The Ephesians to whom St- Paul addressed 
his epistle, in which he particularly urged on the servant 
the duty of obedience to hrs master, were subjects of the 
Roman Empire. To the Civilian, or the classical 
scholar, it is unnecessary to state, that a slave under the 
Roman institutions, was of all slaves, the most wretched 
and unprotected. He held every thing, even life itself, 
by the precarious tenure of his master's will.f 

But it is said, that the spirit of Christianity forbids 
Slavery. " Do unto others as you would they should do 
unto you," is Scripture morality and overthrows the in- 
stitution. Let us examine this objection a moment. 

No interpretation of the Bible can be correct which 
makes that sacred volume contradict itself. It reveals 
to the world, the will of God respecting his creatures in 
a harmonious manner. Where, therefore, two interpre- 
tations may be made, one consistent and harmonious, the 
other contradictory, the former must prevail. 

* Exod. xx. 17. 

t Juv. Sat.' vi. 219. Hor. Sat. Lib. I Sat. a v. 80, 81,82, 
Adam'sRoman Antiquities, p. 40, 41, 42, &c. on Slaves, 

2* 



18 THE MORALITY CfP SLAVERY; 

The Bible positively asserts the criminality of covet- 
ing the property of an other ;* and as we have already 
seen, permits the right of property in slaves. The Bible 
permitting the right of property in slaves and the muni- 
cipal laws- having established Slavery under permission 
of the right v the property in slaves becomes as complete 
and unquestioned as any other species of property.. 
Clearly, then, to covet the freedom of a slave is as crim- 
inal as to covet the value of the slave from his master 
in money, or other property ; for, to emancipate the 
slave without a fair equivalent given to the master, in- 
jures the master to the full amount of his slave's value. 
No motive, no matter how meritorious it may be in itself, 
can sanctify the violation of a Scripture command ; and 
fhe motive loses its merit, when it leads to such a result. 
The freedom of all mankind and a perfect equality of 
right among men, may be a delightful beau ideal, of 
human perfectibility, and may swell the heart with long- 
ings after such a pleasing event in the affairs of mortals ; 
but it cannot justify the invasion of the rights of pro- 
property. Even the slave himself, though tempted by 
the suggestions of natural impulse, ought not to covet 
his own freedom, without a fair equivalent to the mas- 
ter ; because he is a moral agent and subject to the re- 
quirements of the Moral Law. 

That interpretation of the maxim, "Do unto others 
as you would they should do unto you," which would 
make a master emancipate his slaves, would also make 
a person possessed of two plantations, give one of them 
to his indigent neighbour, who had none at all : or a 
creditor, who had large claims, to release them to his 
debtors ; in fact, it would confound every idea of jus- 
tice. 

The laws of society in their operation, necessarily 
produce inequalities in the condition of men. Some 
will be rich and others poor. The natural impulse of 
the heart will teach the poor to wish for the station and 

* Exod. xx. 17. 



TIFE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. J. 9 

acfvantages of the rich. Were the scene reversed, and 
the rich reduced to poverty, they would naturally wish 
that they might be possessed of the wealth and enjoy- 
ments of those in more advantageous situations. Must 
men, therefore, be continually dividing their possessions 
among those, who are poorer than themselves ; and 
regard nothing as their own, so long as they can find 
any one in circumstances more indigent than their's ; 
or so long as poverty sighs for the privileges and 
enjoyments of wealth 1 Such would be the operation 
of the maxim as interpreted. But such interpreta- 
tion cannot be right ; because, it not only involves 
the Bible in contradictions ; but it leaves no place 
for the duties of charity, and invites the lazy and worth- 
less to continue in their courses under the guaranty, tha 
their indolence and riot shall be fed from the industrv 
of the prudent and virtuous ; in fact, it destroys the 
institution of property. Justice is as much inculcated in 
Scripture morality as benevolence, and that cannot be 
moral, which, in its tendency, confounds all notions of 
justice. 

The maxim, when fairly interpreted, in reference to 
Slavery, means this, that a master should treat his slave 
with that humanity and kindness, which he would wish 
to receive from his slave, were their conditions reversed.. 
It contemplates no subversion of the rules of society or 
the laws of property. St. Paul has not left us without 
authority on this point, and his injunctions on masters, 
harmonize throughout with our interpretation of thr 
maxim.* 

Upon the whole then, whether we consult the Jewish 
polity instituted by God himself ; or the uniform opinion 
and practice of mankind in all ages of the world ; or 
the injunctions of the New-Testament and the Moral 
Law ; we are brought to the conclusion,, that Slavery i^ 
not immoral. 

* Eph. vL9. Coloss. iv. 1. 



SECTION 1ST, 



The Morality of Slavery considered wits 
reference to consequences. 



Slavery, though in itself innocent, like all institutions 
in which the passions and frailties of human nature are 
concerned, is liable to abuse ; and evil consequences may, 
and perhaps sometimes do, grow cut of it. These 
consequences may be considered under the following 
heads, viz: — 

I. As to the Government. 

II. As to the Master. 

III. As to the Slave. 

A fourth head might be added, as to the Slave-market, 
but this branch of the subject, so far as the present 
inquiry is concerned, may be aptly enough examined 
under our third head. 

I. As to the Government. 

The Government of a country, may without any 
breach of morality institute Slavery, since such an 



22 THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. 

institution is not immoral. But to be clear of the guili 
of consequences, it must make and enforce such laws as 
will preserve the institution from abuse. This done, 
the Government is no longer chargeable with conse- 
quences, and the institution stands vindicated from all 
participation in the immorality of individuals. The 
Governments in the South of North- America, where 
Slavery exists, have done this and in proof thereof we 
offer the following particulars. 

1. The protection of life, which is the first and most 
important right guaranteed by Governments to men, is 
as amply secured to the slave as to the freeman. The 
murder of a slave is punished with death.* Herein, 
the law of South-Carolina is more provident of human 
life, than was the law of Moses,t this entrusted the safety 
of the bondsman to the interest of the master, rather 
than the protection of Government, that multiplies the 
securities of the Slave, by adding the safeguards of the 
law to the vigilance of the master's interest. 

When charged with capital crimes or minor offences, 
slaves are by law entitled to a fair trial ; and the master 
of such slaves must be notified of the crime and the 
time and place of trial,} to the intent that he may use 
means to shield the innocent from punishment, and see 
that none are unlawfully condemned. 

Such is the humanity of the law, protecting the slave 
from the cruelty of individuals, even the master himself, 
by visiting the penalty of death on his murderer ; and 
securing to him the privilege of a fair trial in all cases 
where the law itself holds him answerable for diso- 
bedience. 

2. Another right incidental to that last considered, 
and for the security of which men enter into society and 
form Governments, is the enjoyment of life unmolested 
and unrestrained, except so far as the public good may 
require. § All other restraint upon a freeman is tyranny, 

" A. A. of S. C. 1821. t Exodus, xxi. 20, 21. 
frA. A. of S. C. 1831. $ Paley Mor. Ph.. 325. 



THE MORALITY OP SLAVERY. 2S 

and on a slave wickedness and cruelty. The law 
diligently secures to free citizens this right, by U •'• ig 
every one unrestrained to seek his happiness, and 
personal comfort according to the suggestions oi his ■ -v,*n 
discretion ; while it throws around him a strong defence 
against the interferences of others. 

With the slave it is different, but the difference arises 
from the condition to which he is by law consigned. If 
like the freeman he is not allowed to seek his happiness 
and personal comfort according to the suggestions of his 
own will (and this would be to abolish Slavery) the law 
nevertheless, takes care of his health and personal com- 
fort, even should the master be negligent therein, in 
opposition to his true interest. All unnecessary rigour 
in punishment is restrained ;* slaves may not be kept at 
labour more than fourteen hours in the twenty-four,f 
and on few plantations are they employed more than two 
thirds of this time; a mode also is provided by which 
the master who otherwise neglects it, is compelled to 
furnish reasonable food and clothing to his siaves.§ 

In all these respects public opinion and private 
interest aid the humane intentions of the law, in providing 
for the health and personal comfort of the slave ; and 
in consequence of so many and conspiring causes, there 
is not perhaps any where so happy and contented a class 
of persons as the slaves of the South. 

3. The morals of the slave are guarded by many and 
wholesome laws. 

The Romans considered their slaves in the simple 
character of things ;£ and hence that culpable inattention^ 
not only to the morals but also to the happiness and life 
of their slaves, which their institutions exhibited. In 
modern Negro- Slavery the true idea, and that which to 
some extent was admitted into the Mosaic law* is 
adopted, for some purposes the slave is regarded as a 
thing, while for others he is considered a person capable 

■ A. A. of S. C. 1740. P. L. 173. t A. A. of S. C. 1740. 

P. L. 174. § Ibid. 1740, P. L. 174. t Adams' Rota. Antq. 43. 



24 THE MORALITY OF SLAVEfcf. 

of moral agency and accountability. On this compound 
character the Government rests its right on the one 
hand to demand of him obedience to law and iis obliga- 
tion to protect his morals ; while on the other, so far as 
he is a thing or property, he is consigned to the use and 
management of his master. The interest of the master 
is happily in this matter, auxiliary to the demands of 
morality. The slave is more or less valuable in exact 
proportion to his possession of many or few moral quali- 
ties; the master therefore, discarding considerations of 
duty, has strong inducements to protect the morals of his 
slave. 

As regards other persons than the master, the law 
forbids all improper interference by which slaves may 
be corrupted. Not only to sell, but to give intoxicating 
liquors to a slave, without his master's consent is illegal,* 
and to trade with him without the written permission of 
the master is highly penal,t so also, to harbour, conceal, 
or entertain, a fugitive or runaway slave is punished with 
much severity .| 

There is a number of other provisions of law defensive 
of the same point, but it is not necessary particularly to 
refer to them. If the use of ardent spirits be suppressed 
and the temptation to theft be removed by destroying 
their ability to trade, the slaves cannot, as will readily 
be perceived, be very immoral. 

4. The slave is allowed all religious privileges neces- 
sary to his Christian comfort and edification. He may 
worship at whatever church he chooses, and the law 
secures to him the right of Sabbath.§ 

It is manifest therefore, that the law imposes no 
restraints upon the slave, nor permits any rigour in his 
domestic m inagement, which the public good does not 
require ; and at the same time, it is vigilant in the pro- 
tection of his life, personal comfort, moral and religious 
privileges. 

* A. A. of S. C P L. 171. t A. A. of S. C. 1817, p. 17. 
i A. A. of S. C. 1822. 6 A. A. 1740, P. h r 168. 



THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. 25 

II. As to the Master. 

All the duties of life, owiftg to the depravity of human 
nature, may be disregarded by individuals, and of conse- 
quence, those resulting from the relation of master and 
slave may like others, be unobserved. In all countries 
and under every variety of institutions, some persons 
will be negligent of their obligations, but it is yet be to 
learned that masters are more negligent of their obliga- 
tions than any other class of persons, or that they are 
particularly guilty of moral obliquities in the manage- 
ment of their slaves more than on any other subject. 

The truth is, the slaves in the Southern States are the 
happiest people on earth. The law as well as public 
opinion reprobates all rigour in the treatment of them, 
while interest lends energy to the humane suggestions of 
the master's heart, teaching him to clothe and feed them 
with such meat and raiment, as are needful for them ; to 
provide comfortable accommodation for their lodging; 
to abstain from useless rigour in punishment; not to 
require too much or too constantly continued labour of 
them ; to have them well attended in seasons of sickness^ 
to protect their rights of person and morals from the 
violation of strangers; in short, to minister to their Com- 
fort and advance their happiness in all the ways and by 
all the means in his power. This is not a sketch of 
fancy, but the sober reality of life, exhibited on almost 
all the plantations of slaves in the South. Indeed ! were 
it the habit of the author, ever to use his pen, in decking 
themes of declamation, or in presenting in polished 
phrase and ornamented language, subjects to delight the 
taste or amuse the imagination, he knows of none con- 
nected with human happiness on which, he would sooner 
try his skill than Negro-slavery, such as he has seen it 
from infancy to the middle of life. 

One, who has resided on plantations of Negroes and 
witnessed the deep revelry of heart and joyous hilarity 
of countenance which they exhibit in their amusements, 
or on the return of their holidays ; the ardent sympathy 

3 



2(j THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY* 

with which they enter into all the scenes and vicissitudes, 
of the master's life and family ; how they sorrow in the 
adversity, and mingle the joyous laugh, and happy, 
though simple remark, in the glad scenes of the house- 
hold, can alone rightly comprehend their happiness. — 
The Roman lyrist, when tuning his sweetest song and 
warbling with matchless grace and simplicity, the delights 
of domestic happiness and rural enjoyment, deemed 
his strain unfinished, until he had introduced laughing 
slaves, joyous and contented around the household gods 
of their rich master.* The Southron, who has seen the 
same feelings and delights exhibited by the contented 
and well-provided negro-slaves, is, better than any other 
person, prepared to relish and admire the poet's selec- 
tion of incidents, advantageously to present the picture 
of domestic happiness and rural comfort. 

To hear at night, when the solemn silence of the 
scene has attued the heart to devotion, the songs of 
Zion, at a distance, caroled in tones of sweetest melody 
by many co-mingled voices, when native harmony out- 
vies instructed skill; surely cannot excite the idea in 
the auditor, that wretchedness inspires the choir. Or, 
on Sunday morning, to see the happy and well-dressed 
negro-slaves in crowds urging their way to the house of 
God, to enjoy the benefit of religious instruction and 
partake of the privileges of public worship, can hardly 
awake the thought in the observer, that they are either 
miserable or persecuted. And yet, such is the melody 
with which night after night the Negroes charm the ear ; 
and such the exhibition of happiness and devotion, 
which sabbath after sabbath, presents. 

The attention and care of masters cannot fail to be 
productive of comfort and happiness to the slave, and of 
credit and satisfaction to themselves. In the main, the 
duties incumbent on masters stand on the same footing 
and are as faithfully performed, as other relative duties. 
If occasionally a monster is found who tramples on his 

*Hor, Epod. Lib. CEd. 2. 



THE MORALITY OP SLAVERY 27 

slave, and withholds from him those kind offices and 
careful protection, which his station binds upon him as 
a duty ; so also, may the cowardly wretch be found, 
who lifts his hand against her, who confided in his love,, 
and by every species of domestic torture and tyranny, 
renders that heart miserable, whose affections he treach- 
erously won, and basely blasted. The one character is 
as despicable as the other, and the one, as much proves 
that Matrimony is wrong, as the other proves the impro- 
priety of Slavery. 

There are some peculiar questions connected with 
this relation, which we propose briefly to examine. 

I. The Domestic Slave Trade. 

The power to transfer slaves from one to another, is 
an important incident to the right of property in them. 
To say, that any right which civil government creates 
is naturally inalienable, involves an absurdity. The 
moment a person enters into society and holds his rights 
by virtue of its authority, he ceases to claim by the law 
of nature. His rights are no longer natural, but civil. 
Even the rights of extreme necessity and self-defence, 
where a person may disregard the ordinary restraints 
of law, and take his protection and safety into his own 
keeping, though founded in nature, are in society, civil 
rights. Inalienable rights are made such by the law of 
the land. 

Property is the creature of civil authority, and subject 
to such rights and incidents as that authority prescribes.* 
We have already seen that slaves are rightfully made 
property, and hence, we infer, the right of transfer as 
an incident. But the question is clearly settled in the 
law of Moses to which we have already referred; and 
the right of transfer established beyond a doubt.f If, 
Jiowever, this right be abused, and evil consequences 
follow, he is criminal whose agency produced the evil. 

i: Bl, Com. Vol. ii. 14. t Lev. xxi. 44, 45, 46. See Ante, p, V2 



2.8 THE MORALITY OP SLAVERY. 

Thus, if the owner of Slaves without good reason, such 
as unpardonable disobedience, or gross misconduct; or 
some other justifiable cause, sell them and they fall into 
the hands of cruel masters; or are sent to distant parts 
by reason of which the tender connexions which they 
may may have formed are broken ; he is justly charged 
with, of the guilt incurred in the transaction. Again ; if 
the owner of slaves imprudently contract debt, for the 
payment of which his slaves are, by operation of law, 
taken and sold, and the like consequences of cruelty and 
disruption of sacred ties follow, he is guilty of immoral- 
ity. 

The Domestic Slave Trade, properly so called, which 
is carried on by speculators as a constant employment 
for gain, we consider abusive of the right of dominion 
over slaves. , As generally conducted, it is productive 
of bad consequences; and those engaged in it are 
reputed to be, and generally are, men of corrupt morals 
and little feeling. Were men of humane dispositions 
and correct moral principles to conduct this business, 
instead of evil, much good might be done. Such men, 
would not separate, either in their purchases or sales, 
families of negroes ; and they would always choose a 
subtraction from their gains rather than a violation of 
duty,* But such men could not compete with those, 
who are alike destitute of honesty and humanity, and of 
course this last class will generally monopolize the 
market. 

Apart from the abuse to which the domestic slave- 
trade, is subject, it rests on strong grounds of justifica- 
tion. 

The right to buy slaves for use cannot be disputed ; 
and what one may do personally, he may also do by an 
agent. The speculator, it is said, is but the agent of the 
planter who wishes to purchase slaves, and the trade is 
but the effect of the demand for slaves on the plantations 
to which he carries them ; and if speculators did not 
supply the demand, the planters would do, personally or 
by immediate agency, what the speculators now do fo* 



THE MORALITY OP SLAVERY. 29 

them. Besides, the domestic-slave trade, is not charge- 
able with those horrid consequences, which sometimes 
attended the African slave trade, and made it so odious 
in the eyes of England and the United States. Here are 
regular governments and property is amply secured ; so 
that wars cannot be stirred up for the express purpose 
of taking captives for the market, nor can slaves be 
stolen with impunity ; nor, least of all, can a person not 
subject to the laws of slavery be consigned to that con- 
dition. 

But we apprehend that it would be better, were the 
planters to superintend this business themselves, rather 
than uphold and encourage speculators. They would 
be more mindful of the comfort and happiness of their 
slaves, and would generally be men of better feelings and 
principles. In conformity with this view, most of the 
slave-holding States have, at various times, made legis- 
lative inhibitions on the subject. Residents, or those, 
who proposed to become residents in the State, only 
were* permitted, by these regulations to bring slaves into 
it. 

II. The Disruption of the Marriage-tie. 

Slaves cannot make a civil contract ; as to this, the} 
are entirely under the power and control of the master. 
Marriage among slaves, therefore, is not a legal con- 
tract, under the sanction and protection of civil autho- 
rity ; but a quasi-veWgioxxs obligation*, assumed with a 
perfect knowledge of all the contingencies on which the 
connexion formed, must rest, and of course, presenting 
no impediment to the operations of law, as the law 
knows nothing of it. 

The disruption of this tie, or obligation, is an evil 
which often attends Slavery ; but the government is not 
chargeable. It is a question of morality, for the con- 
science of the master, or the slave. 

If, the disruption be produced by the caprice or im- 
prudence of the master, he is culpable ; if, however, the 

S* 



30 TUB MORALITY OF SLAVERY. 

master be unfortunate merely, and the slave be sold and 
the marriage tie broken, then if guilt attach at all, it is 
to the slave, who formed the connexion, cognizant of the 
multiplied uncertainties on which it stood. In truth, 
neither master nor slave, is criminal in the last case, 
nor can the most rigid casuist contend otherwise ; unless, 
the slave should after separation from his or her first 
companion, contract a second marriage. 

To the credit of masters generally, it may be said, 
that they are attentive to the comfort and wishes of their 
slaves on this subject ; and when arrangements can be 
made to prevent the separation of man and wife, such 
arrangements are commonly made, with great cherful- 
ness. 

III. As to the Slave. 

It is objected to Slavery, that it degrades the slave, 
and by that means injures society ; as a freeman would 
be a much more valuable member ; and, but for the insti- 
tution, freemen would occupy the places now filled with 
slaves. 

The last part of this objection, will be more appro- 
priately examined under another branch of the inquiry : 
at present, we will only consider the first part of it. 

No one will pretend, that a Negro-slave in America is 
more degraded in any particular, than his ancestor was 
in Africa ; or that his condition is, in any respect, worse, 
than it would have been, had he been born in Africa; 
on the contrary all must admit it to be much better.* 
Instead of the precarious subsistence and personal inse- 
curity of the savage state, he enjoys the certain means 
of support, and the safe protection of civilized life ; 
instead of the despotic dominion of a capricious and 
ignorant chieftian, filled with a lust of war, and a total 
disregard to the happiness of his subjects, whose life and 

t Notes to Cooper's Justinian and References there made, p. 4- 
\% and 41 3- 



THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. 31 

services are at. his disposal, either in peace or war;* he 
is under the control and management of a kind and pro-* 
vldent master, who directs his industry to profitable 
en ;id supplies his wants, and who at the same time, 
is restrained by law from acts of cruelty ; atoove all, 
instead of the ignorance and errors with which supersti- 
tion darkens the mind and misguides the affections of the 
heart, he is instructed in religious truth. 

When, therefore,, the slave is said to be degraded, 
comparison is made, not between him and his African 
ancestor ; nor between his condition in America and 
what it would have been in Africa ; but between him 
and a freeman in America. 

It is true, a slave has no political rights, and is subject 
to more civil restraints than a freeman. But if he were 
lawfully made a slave and in that condition is subjected 
to no restraints but those which the good of society and 
the rights of property require, the question is at an end 
so far as he is concerned. There can be no immorality 
in the nature of his condition, on which he can found a 
claim of exemption from the laws of the community in 
which he resides. 

But the question will be asked, can a man be lawfully 
made a slave 1 

Pure Slavery, where the master is clothed with the 
absolute power of life and death, we consider inconsis- 
tent with good morals, and ought not to exist. Into 
Slavery of this kind a man cannot be reduced — but 
Slavery such as exists in the United States, which leaves 
the life of the slave under the protection of government 
and not at the capricious mercy of the master, is lawful 
and into it a man may be reduced.t This question has 
been already settled by a direct appeal to the highest 
standard of morals known to men ; and we do not pro- 
pose to discuss the subject again; but will briefly inquire 

* Cabinet Cyclopedia, Vol. iv. p. 16. 

* See Prof. Dew's Disquisition ; where Blackstone's objections- 
to Slavery, are answered and Leviticus, pas. 



32 THIE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. 

into the origin of Slavery as set forth in the Bible, and 
then shew that the Negroes came fairly into bondage. 

Among the Jews, under the Mosaic institutions, there 
were six sources of Slavery. 

1. When a man sold himself through poverty. Lev. 
xxv. 39. 

2. When a father sold his children. Exod. xxi. 7. 

3. When creditors seized and sold their insolvent deb- 
tors or their children. 2 Kings, iv. 1. 

4. A thief was sold when he could not pay his fine or 
make restitution, Exod-xxii. 3. 4. 

5. Prisoners of war. 

6. A Hebrew slave ransomed from a Gentile, might 
be sold to another Hebrew by his master. 

Upon analysis we find, that these six sources of 
Slavery may, in principle, be reduced to two; viz. l.jurc 
gentium, as prisoners of war : 2- jure civili, either upon 
contract, or by simple operation of law, by way of punish* 
ment; as in the instances above stated, except the fifth ; 
3. a third source of Slavery necessarily arises incidental 
to these two, and is plainly recognized in the Bible ; viz. 
by birth, semi nascuntur. 

Having thus briefly stated the sources of Slavery as 
recognized in the Bible, we now proceed to prove that 
the Negro-slave came fairly into bondage. 

No question in morals is more clearly settled than the 
duty of obedience to civil authority. There are two 
theories on the subject, but botli equally enjoin this duty 
though on widely different principles- The one rests it 
on expediency ; the other,, on compact. In the former 
case, the obligation is deduced from the consideration, 
that obedience to Government promotes human happi- 
ness, and that men are morally bound to prefer that, 
which promotes this end, because, God designs the 
happiness of his creatures: in the latter, it results from 
the contract of the governed, with the Government, 
which they may not in good faith, disregard so long as 
the Government performs its stipulated duties. The 
theory of compact is considered preferable. Not only 



FHE MORALITY OP SLAVERY. 33 

the municipal regulations of a nation, but the interna- 
tional code likewise, claim the obedience of the citizen 
or subject, and the last is equally with the first supposed 
to be founded in the consent of the citizens or subjects. 
Let us now apply these principles to the Africans who 
have been made slaves. 

The interior and western part of Africa, is divided 
into numerous tribes or nations. Each has its own 
internal regulations, and among them is a species of 
international law. One of the rights of war recognized 
by this law, was originally to put captives to death. 
Time modified this provision of their international code, 
and Slavery was substituted for death. The victorious 
African therefore, who made one of a neighbouring tribe 
his captive in war, had a right to make him a slave by 
the captive's own consent and agreement, according to 
the theory of compact, and life was the equivalent 
received for the sale of his liberty, or rather we should 
say (for in Africa itself, the Negroes are in a state of 
worse servitude than any where in America) for the pri- 
vilege of changing his master. 

The African master then, having a clear title to his 
slave, undoubtedly had a right to sell him. From such 
masters, did the Americans derive their titles to Negro- 
slaves. Under this view of the subject, the Africans 
became slaves by their own consent ; and for the highest 
equivalent they could receive. In this country their 
condition is much better than it was in Africa, and there- 
fore, they cannot say that the terms of their captivity 
and Slavery are broken by their sale and removal to 
America and that they are consequently released from 
their obligation to obey as slaves. 

One other view on this point suggests itself. Slavery 
whether arising from the law of nations, or from civil 
regulations among each tribe, certainly existed in Africa* 
in almost all, if not all, the tribes. Each tribe was a 
distinct nation or people, and had a right to regulate its 
internal concerns ; and no foreign power could have any 
right to gainsay such regulations, but according to no- 



34 THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. 

tional comity and universal usage would be bound to 
respect them; and whatever the constitued authorities 
did with a foreign power, would be legal and binding and 
of moral validity. On the other hand, the subjects of 
these tribes, would be clearly bound to the civil authori- 
ties thereof to yield obedience, which is supposed to rest 
on their contract or agreement. Clearly then, when the 
constituted Governments of these tribes sold slaves to 
foreigners, they acquired a good title. 

Having established the point, that the first African 
slaves were legally brought into bondage, the right to 
detain their children in bondage follows as an indispen- 
sible consequence. Not only the civil law, but the law 
of Moses also, asserts the doctrine of "partus sequitur 
ventrem." There is much reason and good sense in the 
rule, but we do not think it necessary to labour this point. 

Thus we see, that the Slavery which exists in Ame- 
rica, was founded in right; that the Governments of the 
States have thrown every safeguard around the institu- 
tion, to preserve it from abuse — that the masters gene- 
rally act kindly towards their slaves, faithfully discharging 
their duty to them, and that the slaves themselves are 
happy, infinitely more so, than they would be in Africa. 



END OF FIRST PART. 




*^* & o " a „ <$> 



.0 



* 



O 



r ov v :<v 




* jp// 



°o 









k 



f 







\9 ^ 






^ V 5 ' 



4> ^ 



A 



< 






+ 
















o V ° 



,0-/ 



c ° " ° " ^ 




^,f /<& 










^ o \0 *7\ 



^^ 





J> \ °% 

* ae/r77^ ° 



*c 



4<^ 


















III ^ ^ A\ 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




011 899 720 7 



